Solar Utilisation & Production Schedule Optimisation
The site already generated solar power, but not always when the factory used the most. Could moving production timing make better use of it?
Open full image ↗The challenge
Atlas Honda had already installed solar generation at the plant. Solar output peaked in daylight hours, while part of the manufacturing day ran into periods with less or no solar generation. The aim wasn’t to generate more; it was to use more of what was already generated. I was asked to assess whether a seasonal change to the working schedule would be operationally and financially worthwhile.
Energy profile
With Maintenance and Utilities, I separated the factory’s demand into base load (what keeps essential systems running even with production stopped) and production load (the extra demand when equipment and supporting utilities are fully running). Comparing that pattern with the solar profile showed when solar was available before the factory reached full load, and when later production relied more on conventional energy.
Shifting the production day
The main scenario moved the start of production about an hour earlier in suitable seasons. Total working hours stayed the same; one existing production hour moved from a low-solar part of the day into a high-solar one.
A second question followed: could some production move into periods where solar generation stayed high but factory demand was low, such as selected weekend hours?
Cost and feasibility
With Finance and the technical teams I compared the cost of the site’s energy sources, so the study valued the conventional energy displaced, not just the solar energy generated. Changing a factory start time also affects much more than electricity, so I checked feasibility with each affected function:
| Function | Question checked |
|---|---|
| Employee transport | Can contractor routes and vehicles support earlier pickups without significant extra cost? |
| Catering | Can meal preparation, staffing and service times move with the schedule? |
| Production shops | Can each area start earlier, and how are its shifts affected? |
| Maintenance & utilities | Can utility start-up, equipment readiness and maintenance cover be aligned? |
| HR & Administration | Do reporting arrangements and contractor coordination still work? |
| Quality & support | Can the support cover production needs move with the schedule? |
Decision framework
- Extra solar usedGeneration that production can now absorb directly.
- Energy avoidedHigher-cost conventional energy no longer needed.
- Gross benefitThe value of that displaced energy.
- Net of operating changesWeighed against any extra transport, catering, shift or contractor cost.
Recommendation and outcome
I combined the technical, operational and financial findings into a management presentation for senior leadership across Production, PPC, HR & Administration, Quality and plant operations. Rather than proposing new investment, it showed how better timing could get more value from an asset already installed.
The study identified a meaningful opportunity to rely less on higher-cost energy through scheduling, and showed that production planning can play a direct part in energy cost. Its value is a recommendation that is financially assessed and operationally checked with every affected function, not a standalone energy calculation.
Energy volumes, tariffs, load figures and shift timings are internal and not published here. The cover image is an illustration, not plant data.
Planning should turn complexity into action.
Open to Production Planner, Materials Planner, Production Controller and Supply Chain Planning roles in the UK.